Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Attached below is my patch from last time I was looking at this
>> problem, it doesn't quite apply but it is gives a good idea of where I
>> think we should go.
>
> merged it up to x86.git - see below.
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Attached below is my patch from last time I was looking at this
> > problem, it doesn't quite apply but it is gives a good idea of where I
> > think we should go.
>
> merged it up to x86.git - s
* Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Attached below is my patch from last time I was looking at this
> problem, it doesn't quite apply but it is gives a good idea of where I
> think we should go.
merged it up to x86.git - see below. Alan, have no tried to build, let
alone boot it.
Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wednesday 05 December 2007 04:48, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 13:26:49 +0100
>> > Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > * Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
>> >
On Wednesday 05 December 2007 04:48, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 13:26:49 +0100
> > Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > * Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > So while the irq compression code on i386
"Natalie Protasevich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think we counted them in the order of 1400 external IRQs (actual
> ioapics/slots plus possible on-card bridges), and yes numbers for used
> IRQs were close to 250. Actual customer configurations could've big
> bigger, I don't have such data.
>
On Dec 5, 2007 3:25 PM, Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Natalie Protasevich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Nov 27, 2007 10:21 PM, Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> commit c434b7a6aedfe428ad17cd61b21b125a7b7a29ce
> >> (x86: avoid wasting IRQs for PCI devices)
"Natalie Protasevich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Nov 27, 2007 10:21 PM, Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> commit c434b7a6aedfe428ad17cd61b21b125a7b7a29ce
>> (x86: avoid wasting IRQs for PCI devices)
>> created a concept of "IRQ compression" on i386
>> to conserve IRQ nu
On Nov 27, 2007 10:21 PM, Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> commit c434b7a6aedfe428ad17cd61b21b125a7b7a29ce
> (x86: avoid wasting IRQs for PCI devices)
> created a concept of "IRQ compression" on i386
> to conserve IRQ numbers on systems with many
> sparsely populated IO AP
* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 13:26:49 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > * Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > So while the irq compression code on i386 should really
> > > be deleted -- even before merging the x86_64 irq-o
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 13:26:49 +0100
Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So while the irq compression code on i386 should really
> > be deleted -- even before merging the x86_64 irq-overhaul,
> > this patch simply disables it on all high
* Christian Kujau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> thanks for the patch and the extensive description. I've applied this to
>> x86.git. Do you agree that this has no urgency for v2.6.24 and is thus
>> v2.6.25 material?
>
> Pardon my ignorance, but: aren't we
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
thanks for the patch and the extensive description. I've applied this to
x86.git. Do you agree that this has no urgency for v2.6.24 and is thus
v2.6.25 material?
Pardon my ignorance, but: aren't we in -rc already? I was under the
assumption that during th
Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> So while the irq compression code on i386 should really
>> be deleted -- even before merging the x86_64 irq-overhaul,
>> this patch simply disables it on all high volume systems
>> to avoid proble
* Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So while the irq compression code on i386 should really
> be deleted -- even before merging the x86_64 irq-overhaul,
> this patch simply disables it on all high volume systems
> to avoid problems #1 and #2 on most all i386 systems.
>
>
Len Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> commit c434b7a6aedfe428ad17cd61b21b125a7b7a29ce
> (x86: avoid wasting IRQs for PCI devices)
> created a concept of "IRQ compression" on i386
> to conserve IRQ numbers on systems with many
> sparsely populated IO APICs.
>
> The sa
16 matches
Mail list logo